The public promotion of the man-made global
warming theory has obviously been extremely political and ideological, not based
on genuine rational science. Scare tactics, exaggerated or blatantly false news reports,
and the vilification and marginalization of scientists who question man-made global warming
are all indicators of a political propaganda campaign.

Most importantly, the reports that are
issued by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (the IPCC)
have always included a summary that dishonestly represents the findings of the
climate scientists whose work these reports are supposed to objectively
represent, and it is the summary that governments and the news media pay
attention to. Furthermore, some crucial IPCC reports have been based on
fraudulent scientific studies, obviously because no real scientific evidence
exists to support the theory of man-made global warming. Everything they say is
simply based on computer models of the climate system, models which have been
shown to be wrong on every prediction.

All of this indicates the
existence of political agendas behind the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW)
movement that are about issues other than, “saving the world from catastrophic
global warming”. However, it is not easy to clearly identify what these
political agendas are.

The AGW movement has always been mostly
a British-American movement. Although some scientists had been investigating the
phenomenon of greenhouse gases from as far back as 100 years ago or even
earlier, the theory of man-made global warming did not achieve any real
political traction until the late 1970's.

In trying to find the source of the man-made global warming
movement, one line of investigation is to question where the massive financial
backing for the movement has come from. A similar line of investigation is to
consider how or why political leaders in the West seem to be under the control
of "other powers" when they promote the AGW agenda.

From these and from other considerations, a picture starts
to emerge of who the forces behind the AGW political agenda really are. It seems
that the origin of the AGW movement can be traced back to the financial elites
, i.e., the private investment bankers, mostly in 'The City of London' but also on
Wall Street in the U.S. The political ideology of these people is expressed in the statements
that come out of The Club of Rome, a think tank or
discussion group that represents the interests of the establishment or, more
specifically, the interests of the elites who control the establishment.

The man-made global warming fraud is clearly all about
some of the wealthiest people in the world (i.e., our "rulers") seeking to maintain and increase both their
wealth and their political power, which is certainly not a new
phenomenon in human history.

Related to the promotion of the AGW agenda,
but usually mentioned in understated tones, has been a push to privatize the
nuclear power stations in Britain and to greatly expand the nuclear power
industry worldwide.

The notes here are just an introduction to what I and many
other people feel are the various interconnected strands of the political agenda
that is really behind the fraudulent science of man-made global warming. In
order to better understand the political agenda, you will need to do your own
further research on the topics mentioned below.

----------------------------------------------------

The 1960's & Mid-1970's

Environmental Pressure Groups
Emerge in the Late 1960's

The 1960's and early 1970's saw the rise of
environmental activist groups such as
Greenpeace and
Friends of the Earth. These groups were
concerned about such issues as pollution, the conservation of natural
resources, the protection of wildlife, and were
very much anti-nuclear power.
Many, but not all of the activists in these movements were also quite
leftist and anti-establishment with the result that they were also active in
other social movements of the time such as the anti-Vietnam War movement,
anti-militarism and anti-imperialism in general (the "peace movement"), the struggle to gain equal rights for
African-Americans, and feminism.

These movements gained quite a lot of popular support
and sympathy in society. As a result of these successes, it is well known
that certain powerful people and groups were worried about a possible mass ideological
shift of the populations of the West towards the left, i.e., towards various
degrees of socialism. This they felt they needed to stop, by any means. To
them, it had and still has, the urgency of life or death.

The Formation of the Club of Rome,
1968

The formation of the Club of Rome in 1968 seems to have
been, in large part, an attempt to co-opt the radical social-change
movements that emerged during the 1960's, including the environmental movement.
In addition to capturing and neutering the political views of leftist activists,
the Club of Rome
aimed to use people's natural concern for the environment, and environmental activism, as tools to further their own
interests,
including the eventual transformation of the environmental movement from anti-nuclear
power to pro-nuclear power.

And this aim
has partially been successful. Today, the traditional issues of environmental
activism have more or less been pushed to the background in favour of just
one issue – reducing mankind's production of CO2 and
imposing worldwide carbon taxes. However, even though the anti-nuclear power
stance of the environmental activists has been softened by their antipathy
towards the use of coal (because it produces CO2), a
strong anti-nuclear sentiment still exists among many environmental
activists. No doubt, those remaining genuine environmentalists will be
increasingly marginalized, to be replaced by great masses of emotion-laden people who know and care little about genuine environmental issues and who single-mindedly focus
only on the imaginary, "carbon pollution".

The members of the Club of Rome in the
past have included some of the world's financial and political elites, including some
European royalty and aristocracy and several former national leaders. In
addition to those members who are extremely wealthy business people
(although the wealthiest seem to avoid visible membership of
the club), the
majority of members are academics, activists, scientists,
economists, former or current United Nations office-holders, and former or
current government officials from various nations, all of whom hold
leadership or influential positions in society.

The purpose of the club
seems to have three main strands – i) to provide a platform for discussion
and the generation of new ideas; ii) to mentor those up-and-coming leaders
and influential people by having them connect with more experienced leaders
who can then imbue them with the fine points of the "correct" ideology,
i.e., the ideology of "our rulers", the financial elites; and
iii) to help members form networks of like-minded elitists.

The
literature that comes out of the Club of Rome has a strongly
intellectualizing and philosophizing tone, especially about the problems
that confront society and the changes that are needed to all of human
society in the future in order to tackle these problems. Even people who
believe themselves to be "humanists" and who are also some variety of
socialist in ideology, are easily deceived by the philosophizing of the Club of
Rome. Although some of the club's plans for change give the illusion, on the
surface, of being socially desirable or for the good of humanity, it is notable that these changes, if they come about, will
further entrench in power, and further enrich, those groups who currently hold
power. Not only that, their plans will, if successful, result in a much more
authoritarian world than what we have been used to.

The Club of Rome is strongly in favor of global governanceand the manipulation of society
(social engineering) in order to
achieve what they claim to be needed global social changes. If you do an
internet search for "global
governance", you might be surprised to see how much this term has
become an accepted part of our language and society nowadays, especially in relation to the United Nations and in
academia.

The ideology that is behind most of the quotes
at Mixing Climate Change
with the Problem of Sustainable Developmentis representative of the ideology of the Club of Rome. In fact, many of the people
quoted in that list are members of the Club of Rome or were before they
died or relinquished their membership since membership is restricted to 100
individuals at any one time.

One major aim of the Club of Rome is to give the
political/financial elites of the Western world a rationale for instituting
global depopulation measures, especially in the poor countries of the world but not
limited to those countries. Since the 1980's they have been using the fraudulent and simplistic claim that the world
is warming because, "too many people are using too much stuff"
as one argument in support of this aim. "Too many people are using too
much stuff" sounds like something you would say to a bunch of
kindergarten kids!

The depopulation ideology (see
here) is closely related
to, but not exactly the same as the older ideology called, "eugenics".
There is a lot of good sense in controlling the world's population but some
of the proposed methods for achieving this are disturbing. For example,
forms of genocide have been proposed, where "genocide" means the killing of
large numbers of certain populations, not necessarily all of these
populations, by the spread of viruses.

However, there are better ways to
reduce population growth besides mass murder. For example, it has been
proven that the two best ways to reduce population growth are to: a) teach
girls to read and, b) to encourage or allow industrial development (economic development) in poor
countries. Proof of this can be seen by the fact that the most economically
advanced parts of the world, such as Europe, North America, Japan &
Australasia (Australia + New Zealand) are all experiencing almost zero population growth, or
even negative growth, among their non-immigrant
populations. But the policies of the Club of Rome lead to roadblocks for those
poverty-stricken countries that are trying to develop economically.

More specifically, it seems clear that one aim
of the Club of Rome is to use a "low carbon lifestyle" ideology to limit
economic development in the developing world, such as in Africa. These poor
parts of the world will find it virtually impossible to develop economically
if they are not allowed to build coal-burning power stations, as the wealthy
nations of the world have done, even though many of these nations have
abundant coal deposits.

One reason they state for why the Club of Rome
wants to limit the development of these under-developed countries is that,
as nations become more developed, they will use more of the world's oil and
other natural resources, thereby reducing what will be available for the
rich developed world. And of course they also claim that any newly
developed nation will greatly add to mankind's emissions of CO2.

But I think their real motive for preventing development in the Third World is this – it is much easier to politically and financially control poor nations,
using debt and wars, than wealthy nations. In fact, control of Africa's
rich natural resources, primarily mineral resources, and also more recently Africa's land for industrial-scale farming, has long been
a key factor contributing to the
wealth of the financial elites of the 'developed' world, going all the way
back to Cecil Rhodes and earlier. If you have
control over a government, you have control over the natural resources under
that government's supervision.

Another reason for restricting the
development of coal power stations in these countries is the desire of the nuclear
power industry to sell their very expensive product, nuclear power stations
to these under-developed nations, which obviously means these nations will
be borrowing a lot of money and of course, going further into debt. See
here.

To repeat: We see that the ideology of the Club of Rome
is the ideology of the political and especially the financial elites of
Western society. This ideology is more or less a continuation of the ideology
of the elites of the 19th and early 20th century, especially in Britain &
the USA,
which was strongly based on eugenics theory. They look down on the bulk of
humanity, even in their own countries, as if we were nothing more than cattle or, "useless eaters"
and they believe that their political, and especially their financial power
gives them the right to decide, in fact to dictate and socially engineer humanity's future.

Some of them have even stated that their position in society,
especially their wealth, gives them not just superior wisdom but is even an
indication of "superior intelligence" due to the superior genes that they
claim to have inherited. As such, they believe they are the
"natural leaders" of humanity. Society really hasn't made as much
progress as we'd like to believe from the days of feudalism and the claim of
the divine right of kings to rule.

A Key Piece of Evidence
Implicating the Club of Rome

Although this outline of the political background to
the man-made global warming movement is being written in chronological
order, let's look at the 1992 Club of Rome report called, "The First
Global Revolution". This book, which was actually first written earlier than 1992, gives
some information about the history of the Club of Rome's
ideological developments.

Page 75 includes this :

(My red underlining.) Previous to that statement, the authors had been
lamenting the difficulty of finding an ideology that they could use to unify
the people of the world in order to bring about the great social and
political changes to the whole world that they want to achieve.

The words,
"came up with the idea" and, "fit the bill" obviously imply that the authors felt that the threat of
global warming was more anexcuse, or a tool
to be used to deceptively manipulate and unify people by the use of fear,
rather than a genuine threat itself.

[Further analysis: See
here for discussion on the use of the
emphatic, "do" and discussion on the use of
the word, "threat".]

The words, "The real enemy then, is
mankind itself" represent the new mantra that they were planning to adopt in
order to gain, not just political and financial
control over the world, but also control over our minds by a kind of semi-religious
brainwashing.
The new religion is a mystical new-age "earth religion", similar
in some ways to the
way aboriginal peoples view the cosmos. (See "Gaia", below.)

Of the four items the author listed, (pollution, water
shortages, famine, and the threat of global warming) the first three are clearly visible, we know them when
we see them; they exist in the physical world. On the other hand, a threat (any
threat), exists only in the mind – it hasn't happened yet and
in fact might not happen – and is
accompanied by fear. But the Club of Rome decided to choose, "the threat of global
warming" as the "common enemy against whom we can all unite".
As Maurice Strong said in one of his interviews, "I found that people were turned on about
the idea that the earth was in danger."
"Turned on"? And is an "idea" the same as a fact?

The author explains the
mistake, i.e., that of "mistaking symptoms (results) for causes". He then continues on about how
we humans are the cause of these problems. This is setting the stage
for, "the threat of global warming" to be developed into, "the
threat of man-made global warming".

Notice that the authors assume
that global warming is all (or mainly) human caused – "All these dangers are caused
by human intervention in natural processes". No mention of what
percentage of global warming is human caused. Is this not lying by the omission
of a key fact?

Although pollution, water shortages and famine are genuine
threats to large numbers of humanity and are the results of
human intervention, these important issues have been pushed to
the background and replaced in importance by the imagined (and
almost certainly mythical), "threat of man-made
global warming".

I found a different edition of the
same book, but with different page numbers, in a public library but, if I
recall correctly, the missing material was not so damaging to the Club of
Rome that it needed to be hidden. On the other hand, since there was
evidence that some parts of one or both editions had been rewritten, it is
impossible to
know what was originally written in those missing pages. The missing pages from the edition
on the internet would be like gold to find!

It seems
obvious that it was the Club of Rome's early interest in
leveraging people's natural concern for the environment, as a tool for gaining global political control,
that eventually grew into the theory of man-made global
warming in the late 1970's.

The Club
of Rome can be considered to be either the source of the
man-made global warming political agenda, based on
fraudulent science, or at the very least, the avenue through
which this fraud was first propagated

This sub-topic is not
directly related to climate but it might give you more information about the
social engineering agenda of
the Club of Rome, although that organization is not mentioned by name on the following webpage or in the audio recordings
mentioned below. Webpage -
http://rense.com/general94/nwoplans.htm

That webpage shows a detailed
agenda for the future of Western, esp. American society as outlined in a
speech given in 1969 by a Dr. Richard Day and as recalled by a Dr. Lawrence Dunegan
(both medical doctors). Some of these predictions for the future were common sense, simply an
extrapolation of what had already happened or had started to happen in the
1960's, some of which was based on recent scientific and technical
developments such as the development of the contraception pill. Furthermore, it must be remembered that the 1960's was a period of
great social change in the USA and Western countries in general. But some
predictions, such as a planned promotion of homosexuality, are more
revealing.

Although no proof has been found that
Dr. Day was a member of the Club of Rome at some time, it is highly
probable that he was because he was considered to be a Rockefeller
insider. Dr. Day had previously served as Medical Director of the Planned
Parenthood Federation of America, an organization that was initiated by David
Rockefeller, or at the very least was heavily supported by him, financially. It is well known that David Rockefeller was (is) a leading member
of the Club of Rome and in fact some people believe that it was Rockefeller
who set up the Club of Rome.

In the 1970's many apocalyptic reports appeared in the U.S.
and British media warning of a devastating coming new ice age. This was
obviously in
response to the 35 years of continuous global cooling that occurred between 1940
and 1975. (See
here on Page 2.)

On this
page you can see a list of just some examples of this media scare campaign. Some
earlier newspaper articles, from 1969, are shown in the similar list,
here. Notably, both lists begin not long after the Club of Rome was
formed.

ii) The April 28, 1975 Newsweek article, titled,
"The Cooling World" A copy of that article is here.

This campaign had so many striking similarities to the
current man-made global warming scare campaign of the recent three decades that it cannot have
been a co-incidence. For example, some of the same "scientists" and other authority figures
were involved in both campaigns, such as the late Prof. Steven Schneider of
Stanford University, a former member of the Club of Rome.

Very revealingly, some scientists were even suggesting that
man-made pollution was partially to blame for the coming ice age and were
advocating a
tax on fossil fuels!
For example, in the following scientifically inaccurate
video from the early 1980's, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqsRD4HPtH0, they were telling us
that the greenhouse effect would help cause the upcoming ice age and that
mankind's use of fossil fuels was accelerating this process!

See especially
between the 4 and 5 minute points and after the 18 minute point. Notice that at
about the 3.50 point in the video they mention the sun's cycles but this is
quickly dismissed. In other words, they were dismissing the major premise of all
climate science textbooks up to that time, i.e., that the sun drives climate on
earth. The whole film is full of speculation and the use of such statements as,
"some scientists now believe ...".

Ironically, there are strong indications
that we really have now started to enter another period of global cooling,
even possibly a 'mini
ice age', that will last for something like 30 years. The evidence for this, besides the
recent extreme cold that has been experienced in various parts of the world, is
the highly predictable cycles of solar activity, which have always
been connected to climate change in the past.

It is almost criminal that the United
Nations is ignoring this and still promoting man-made global warming when
millions of people worldwide will surely starve to death as a result of the crop
failures that will occur during this extended cold period.

[Apparently this approximate period of 30
years of cold started in about 2012 or 2015, is predicted to consist of about 15 years of
gradual cooling, reaching a minimum average global temperature in about the year
2030, followed by about 15 years of gradual warming to get back to where we are
today in about 2045 or 2050.]

That article begins by referring to the copy of a fake Time
magazine cover that is frequently found on the internet. A copy of that cover is
here.
That photo-shopped alteration of a real Time Magazine cover was most probably an
attempt to discredit the anti-Man-Made Global Warming movement. The comments
following that article might provide some useful information and links.

----------------------------------------------------

Connections with the Nuclear Power
Industry

It seems that, for various reasons, the financial elites
are very interested in
greatly expanding the nuclear power industry and, in the
case of Britain, privatizing the nuclear power companies. However, there is one
major problem – coal-fired power stations are more economical to run than
nuclear power stations. The only way that nuclear power stations can be made
economically viable is to make the use of coal more expensive.

A carbon tax
would help do that, especially if accompanied by a phasing-out of coal-fired power stations, which
is occurring. But probably the strongest disincentive for using or building
coal-based power stations would be a binding international agreement limiting CO2
emissions. So far, the AGW proponents have only been partially successful at
bringing this into existence.

In Britain - Prime Minister Margaret
Thatcher(1979–1990)

It is well-known that Margaret Thatcher was a great
promoter in Britain, and worldwide, of the theory of man-made global warming. In
fact, it was Margaret Thatcher who more or less got the ball rolling on this
topic with her
strong government promotion of "scientific" backing for this theory.

She was
also a strong proponent of expanding the nuclear power industry. And it is very
significant that Margaret Thatcher not only broke the back of the British
coal miners' union, she also virtually destroyed the coal industry itself in Britain.

These reports were, more or less, the first
government-commissioned reports in the U.S. concerning man-made global warming, and both state the official
position about man-made global warming that has not changed much until today.

It is notable that on Page 28 of the Jason Report, in the
Conclusions section, we find the following sentence: "Clearly a significant
shift to a nuclear or solar energy economy would postpone carbon-induced climate
shifts." Since solar power is technically not feasible on a large scale at
the moment, that leaves nuclear power as the only option. The writer forgot to
mention wind power but this is also not feasible for large-scale
electricity generation.

AlethoNews Articles

The political blog, alethonews.wordpress.com, has further
interesting information on this topic. In the following article, we learn that
Al Gore is a strong advocate of the nuclear power industry:
http://alethonews.wordpress.com/2009/12/03/theres-more-to-climate-fraud-than-just-tax-hikes/,
just like his father, who was a U.S. Senator and a strong lobbyist for the
nuclear power industry. No doubt the Gore family have
considerable investments in this industry since lobbyists are usually given free or
cheap shares in the industry they lobby for.

There was the unusual appearance of certain
international banking elites at the Fourth World Wilderness Congress in Denver,
Colorado in 1987. This story is told by George Hunt in the Youtube video called,
"The Men Behind the 1992 United Nations Rio Earth Summit".
The links to these videos are shown below.

In the early part of Part 1 of
the videos shown below, Hunt says: "When I served
as an official host at a key environment meeting in Denver, Colorado in 1987, I
was surprised to see David Rockefeller, Edmund de Rothschild, Secretary of State
Baker then Sec. of the Treasury, Maurice Strong, Waste Company Chairman and EPA
Administrator William Ruckelshaus, U.N. Secretary General in Geneva, McNeal and
various World Bank and IMF officials there.
What were the rich elite and bankers
doing at an environment congress?"

"The Men Behind the 1992 United Nations Rio Earth Summit"(George
Hunt)

(This is copied from an old video and it is not in good condition at
certain places.)

If you listen carefully in the 4th video, you will hear the
assumed "fact" stated that human beings are responsible for a
large amount of global warming. This idea was being inserted into the
consciousness of people at the wilderness conference as being important if you
genuinely love the environment and nature.

Most people at that conference would
have been, up to that time, concerned mostly about simply preserving the wilderness –
they probably weren't thinking much about man-made global warming, even though
the promotion of this theory had begun a decade earlier. This was part of the planned politicization
and capturing of the environmental movement. (See also
http://ielts-yasi.englishlab.net/GLOBAL_WARMING_NOTES_Page_2.htm#James Corbett.)

You
will also notice that Edmund de Rothschild's main concern was the gathering of
funds to combat global warming and the formation of an 'environmental bank' to
manage these funds. What he did not state is that the plan was for the bank to
be privately owned, by the Rothschilds of course.

One of the issues connected to all this is
the fact that the U.S. government has apparently mortgaged vast tracts of U.S. wilderness areas
as collateral for the huge debts that the government has incurred with the bankers.
(I'm not sure of the details on this.) Wilderness areas are a valuable resource because they contain untapped mineral
reserves, including oil and gas, and underground water. Land itself is also increasing in importance
because industrial-scale farming is becoming a major new area of investment.

---------------------------------------------------

The Plan of the International Bankers
and Their Ideological Allies to Unify and Control
the World

A major part of the agenda behind the man-made global warming movement is
clearly a plan to create a
world government of some sort, called "global governance" or, "The New World
Order", dominated by and led by the financial elites i.e., by the private
investment bankers.

Another major aim of this New World Order
agenda is a large degree
of privatization of state-owned assets worldwide, which in effect will be the
elimination of almost all forms of public ownership of assets and utilities. In
recent years we have seen a lot of this privatization taking place in places such as
the U.S., Australia, and especially in Europe as European nations "mysteriously" become bankrupt as a
result of over-borrowing from private banks.

In other words, we are witnessing
the seizure of even more wealth, led by a few hundred of the already wealthiest
people in the world. They even plan to eventually privatize all or most of the public
school systems worldwide, which will give them great leverage in manipulating
the minds and attitudes of children.

Historically, manufactured economic
depressions, which have always originated in the banking sector of the economy,
have been a time when the investment bankers bought up other people's assets for pennies on
the dollar. But this time, their plans are even more ambitious.

Refer to the statements of Maurice
Strong and other Club of Rome members concerning the "needed" collapse of the
economies of the industrialized world. Financial misery is NOT in the interest of the people of the world, as the Club of Rome claims to be promoting!

These elites have captured control of various United Nations bodies, which they
are attempting to use as their main avenue of control. Taxing CO2
production on a worldwide scale, and establishing a new, privately owned
international bank to handle these taxes, seems to be one of the major tools
they plan to use in order to achieve this goal of global financial and political
control.

Although taxing CO2 is
ostensibly not for the purpose of paying interest on government loans, (the
principal on these loans is rarely ever paid off in full), the eager involvement
and support of the private bankers for a carbon tax CLEARLY indicates that this
tax is simply another form of wealth transfer from the hard-working people of
the world to the private bankers.

The video clip here sums up the bankers' interest in carbon
taxes quite nicely:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VHIeNfP4Bw.
(My copy of that video is
HERE.)
The video is about the new carbon tax that was instituted in Australia on July 1, 2012. The narrator says that the carbon tax is "an emissions
trading scheme driven by global banking cartel speculators." The July 2012 Libor
banking scandal in Britain shows that the bankers are indeed operating as a
cartel in which fraud is widespread.

In addition to the George Hunt videos above called,
"The Men Behind the 1992 United Nations Rio Earth Summit",
which include Edmund de Rothschild speaking, the links below are some
examples of the great, "altruistic" interest that members of the Rothschild
banking family and their companies show towards the environment. The
Rothschilds (and related families) are, without doubt, the leaders of the international investment
banking fraternity and have been in this position for the past 200 years.

David de
Rothschild

We see that a junior
member of the Rothschild clan and one of the heirs to the vast Rothschild
banking and investment fortune, David de Rothschild is very active
in promoting the cause of man-made climate change. As well as that,
he has several
investments that are intended to profit from this movement. An internet search
will find many articles about his connection to the movement.

For example, he
was very much involved with the mass propaganda event, the Live Earth Concert of 2007
and wrote "The Live Earth Global Warming Survival Handbook".

The following short
video clip shows him at the time of the 2009 Copenhagen Conference mentioning
the difficulty of instituting the "global governance agenda"
relating to a worldwide CO2taxation scheme at Copenhagen:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtudNpL30BU.

Below is a
four-part video showing David de Rothschild giving a talk at a company
called Climate Change
Capital.

This is a major media company that
disseminates weather informationto hundreds, if not thousands of newspapers,
television
and radio stations worldwide, as well as the internet. We are fast
approaching the situation where a very small number of private companies
have a monopoly on the information we receive about the
weather. This is more than simply suspicious especially considering who
owns these private companies. It is an obvious sign that data will almost
certainly be manipulated, possibly falsified, and selectively presented to
us.

Not only that, the manner in which it is presented to us will probably
be crafted to reinforce the perception that we are experiencing
unprecedented, alarming climate change. They cannot pretend that we are
experiencing unprecedented or ever-increasing global warming right now but they can still hype
information to imply that mankind's production of CO2
is causing "climate disruption" (the third incarnation of
"global warming" following "climate change"). And no doubt, they will present a
"record-breaking" high temperature (even one tenth of a degree
higher than previously measured) at some place in the world from time to
time to keep the perception of global warming alive.

I seriously doubt they
have presented any of the record-breaking cold temperatures that have
occurred just in the past few years. See
here.

"Chairman of E.L. Rothschild LLC,
Sir Evelyn de Rothschild, added: “As a family, the Rothschilds
have always been dedicated to the utmost quality of our products and
services. With respect to our investments, we focus on entering into
long-term partnerships with people who share our values. As weather becomes more
extreme around the planet, with greater human and
financial ramifications, we believe that Weather Central will play a
major role in mitigating damage and improving lives. This is important
to the Rothschilds, as it is to Weather Central. We are proud of our new
partnership with them."

and

"The
world’s leading provider
of interactive weather graphics and data services for television, web,
and mobile"

The following website is probably not
directly related to Evelyn de Rothschild's company and website, although
Jacob Rothschild is involved with it.

Evelyn de Rothschild said in the
interview that his website is, "myweather.com". So I put that website into
my browser today (July 16, 2014) and a few times in the days before that and
I was struck by the generally bleak and even fearful nature of most articles
on the front page. The bad or dangerous weather, wherever it is in the
world, is emphasized and there is very little about good weather.

The company that runs
http://www.weather.com was originally called, "The
Weather Channel". It was bought by a consortium of investors including
the Blackstone Group in 2008. Significantly,
Jacob Rothschild is a major investor in Blackstone
(see
here). The company
name was changed to "The Weather Company" in 2012.

A quote from
http://www.weather.com: “across
all its platforms - television, online, desktop and mobile - The Weather
Channel has a 76 percent share
of the huge U.S. weather audience.”

Another person to research is Maurice Strong,
who was a United Nations official and who laid much of the groundwork for the
formation of the United
Nations International Panel on Climate Change (the IPCC) in 1988. He was apparently a member of the Club of Rome at some
stage and was very
active in promoting the club's agenda from the early 1970's, as the 1972 BBC
video clip below shows.

At that time, the issue that was being used to "unite
people" was mainly the Club of Rome promoted idea of sustainable development – the theory of man-made global
warming didn't come to the forefront until around 1978/9. 'Sustainable
development' sounds good in theory but, of course, it all comes down to who sets
the parameters for what is sustainability, who controls this development, and
how it is controlled.

It is important to understand that Maurice Strong represented certain people "behind the curtain" who are much more powerful than
Strong himself. For example, the
Rockefeller family and the wealthy
Desmarais
family of Canada were early mentors of Strong. And he has always been active in
money-making ventures, including from the oil business.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGAAQnGAypI is an interview of
Maurice Strong in Brazil in 2012, when he went there for the "Rio + 20"
Conference. The first couple of minutes are in Portuguese, with the
English-language interview starting at about 2.30. You will hear him talk
about the danger of the "extinction of humanity" and the importance of "the
relief of poverty" (the standard pseudo 'progressive' propaganda from
the Club of Rome) but, of course. he doesn't mention allowing Africans to develop by
generating electricity from coal.

Canadian journalist Daniel Wood spent a week at Strong's ranch, getting to know
Maurice Strong and his wife. Based on that visit, he wrote a magazine
article in 1990 called, "The Wizard of Baca
Grande".

Maurice Strong's website:
This website has a good collection of the main environmental
reports that were produced by the various organizations that he led,
especially at the United Nations: http://www.mauricestrong.net/

---------------------------------------------------

The New-Age 'Earth
Religion' based on the Ancient Greek Goddess, Gaia

From the "hippy" of the 1960's to the pro-nuclear power Gaia girl
of the
2000's

Many people have commented on how some of those trying to
push the man-made global warming agenda seem to have an almost religious passion
about this topic. But it is not so well-known that there actually is
a kind of religion that is intimately tied up with this. For many people,
this religious aspect has probably been the major force that propelled them into
believing the man-made global warming pseudoscience, even if they are not fully
aware of it, since this dogma has saturated the media and school lessons in the
past two or three decades.

We also have the strange phenomenon of Maurice Strong, a
practical and highly ambitious businessman who rubs shoulders with the most
powerful people on earth becoming enthusiastic about this quasi-religion, as
this article shows,
wizard_baca_grande_1990.pdf.

So what is the explanation for the rise of
this quasi-religion?

Before considering the explanation, let's first look at
some background information.

In 1972 the eminent British scientist and author, James
Lovelock, proposed a theory to describe the whole earth, both the living and
non-living, as a complex system that is in a state of homeostasis, or
self-regulating balance, based on feedback mechanisms. He renamed the Earth
itself "Gaia", after the ancient Greek goddess of the Earth who was believed to
have brought the earth out of chaos. However, according to Lovelock's theory or
hypothesis, there is one thing that is out of balance with this natural system –
mankind or, more specifically, mankind's activities.

Lovelock has always tried to claim that his theory is
scientific, not religious or based on the supernatural. But not only do some of
his own statements about Gaia contradict that assertion, the practical result of
the 'Gaia theory' has clearly been the creation of a 'New-Age'
quasi-religion.

Furthermore, the obvious question is, why did Lovelock name a
supposedly scientific theory after the Greek goddess of the earth? Or, even more
significantly, why did a scientist feel the need to rename the Earth
itself after this goddess? To me, this was obviously a contrivance, for
brainwashing purposes. Can you visualize it – people in the future, even
scientists, using the word, "Gaia" where we now use the words, "the earth" and
dictionaries eventually stating that "Gaia" is a synonym for "the earth"?
Changing the language is one of the most powerful of propaganda or brainwashing
tools.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_hypothesisWikipedia pushes
the man-made global warming propaganda in all of its articles related to this
topic.Although Wikipedia is not a
bad source of information for some topics, it is always biased on
political topics.Notice how this
article goes into some detail to explain the 'Gaia hypothesis', as if it were a
genuine "scientific hypothesis", avoiding any mention of the religious aspect or the
criticisms of this theory until after the reader has been thoroughly immersed in the
'scientific' explanations, and then only mentioning these points in a few words.

http://contenderministries.org/UN/gaia.phpThis website is
written from an evangelical Christian viewpoint. I do not agree with their
political ideology at all, nor with their religious views. But the article is a
good example of how many Christians feel about this earth religion.

Professor Tim Flannery

Professor Tim Flannery was formerly the Head of
the Australian Climate Commission, a federal government body. (The Commission
has now been disbanded.) The following video shows him, supposedly a
scientist, in a 2011 interview by The Guardian newspaper and website, in
which he includes a reference to "Gaia" -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=SeNDSeknn_c.
Notice his artificially inserted and insincere comment near the end of the video about "equality" in society,
a typical Club of Rome trait.

To summarize what the explanation for the emergence of this
quasi-religion is, just go back and read what was written on Page 75 of The
First Global Revolution (see above). As I wrote, "Previous to that
statement, the authors had been lamenting the difficulty of finding an ideology
that they could use to unify the people of the world in order to bring about the
great social and political changes to the whole world that they want to achieve."

Religion is one of the best tools for unifying people. As the website, pantheism.net (see above) shows, they are even attempting to unite
several religions into
one. This is an especially powerful tool in the West with the large decrease in
the number of traditional Christian believers in the past 50 years.

---------

James Lovelock Partly
Recants

In about January 2012, James Lovelock said in an interview,
"I was 'alarmist' about climate change", "We don't know what
the climate is doing" and, "I made a mistake".
This was quite a turn-about! In previous
years, he had made some of the most outrageously alarmist statements about
coming global warming that have ever been made.

In the interview, he also acknowledged that the global climate hadn't warmed in the
previous 12 years. Phil Jones, the former fraudulent head of the CRU at
East Anglia University (see Climategate),
has also made the
same acknowledgement. (For Dr. Jones, see http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8511670.stm
and also some of his emails that were released by the Climategate whistleblower.)

All climate experts say the recent warming period,
which started in 1975, stopped in 1998 (a period of 23 years of warming), which
makes it the past 18 years (as at 2016) without
further global warming. Eighteen years of non-warming is the whole life of those
teenagers who have been brainwashed to have a pessimistic outlook for
the future of their world. And 18 years is as far back as today’s 22-year-olds
can remember.

In the old Pete Seeger song, "Where Have All the Flowers Gone?"
there is the refrain, "When will they ever learn?" In other words, if these young "sheeple"
can be so easily brainwashed in an extended period of no global warming that has
existed for all their lives, what hope is there for the truth to dawn on
the majority of them? Vast numbers of
young people today have their life-long ideological viewpoints already firmly
set by this fraudulent propaganda, since childhood and the teenage years are the
years when these viewpoints are mainly formed.

Of course, we can thank the
schools and universities for this brainwashing, along with the mainstream media
and various political parties.

The following links have
some information about politics and the
AGW movement. However, except for the first link here, I don't often see
material on the internet that attempts to get to the political roots of the
Man-Made Global Warming movement, or that look at the history of this politics,
although I'm sure such webpages are out there somewhere.

The excellent, very
intelligently presented film,"The Great Global Warming Swindle"
mentions several of the same political points that I wrote about above.
It features several scientists who previously contributed to United
Nations IPCC reports but have since resigned from the IPCC. This is a MUST SEE!

The website,
https://enthusiasmscepticismscience.wordpress.com/about/has the
following statement written at the top of each page: – "on the origins
and impacts of Global Warming Alarmism in the history and philosophy of
science". With that aim in mind, the website does a very good job of
detailing the history of this corruption of science.

The author of that
website is Bernie Lewin, an Australian environmentalist who does not accept
the man-made global warming proposition. He seems to shy away from explicit
political statements but concentrates more on this (obvious) corruption of
science. However, we can gain some insight into his political leanings by
the fact that he wrote in his 'About' page that he used to be, or still is,
a member of the Australian "progressive" political activism group, Get Up!

Dr. Tim Ball is a former climatology professor at the
University of Winnipeg, Canada. He has been an outspoken opponent of the
man-made global warming theory for decades and you can find several articles, videos and
audio recordings of him on the internet. In the interview conducted by James
Corbett shown below, he
discusses some of the main scientific flaws in the theory of anthropogenic
global warming and the political agenda behind it.

Although I have the highest respect for Dr.
Ball as a scientist, I find it strange that he cannot distinguish between
Marxism and Fascism. Both are totalitarian but they are at opposite ends of
the spectrum, and are very much mutually antagonistic. Dr. Ball is correct
in identifying the political corruption of science here, but his
interpretation of the deeper motives for this political interference is, in
my opinion, mistaken.

This revelation is a very
significant development but we won't see this news in the mainstream media.

The Editor of Lancet, probably the leading
medical science journal in the world, is not just referring to medical science
here – if you carefully read his statements, you'll see that he is
referring to all scientific research today.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4-CMSu4yoE In this video she
mentions how she used to be "a Green" but then she "grew up".
The video gives us some information about the bankers' interest in man-made global
warming.

"How the Global
Warming Scare Began",
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyUDGfCNC-k.
Although that video gives us useful information about probably one of the
major factors in the development of of AGW movement in
the USA, I don't think it gives the complete story of how this scare began.
Several different developments were taking place at about the same time, not
only in the USA but also in Britain.

The well-researched website www.green-agenda.comdiscusses The Club of Rome and its relationship to the
'man-made global warming'
question. It includes many links to other places on the internet where you
can learn more about other organizations related to the Club of Rome and the
people involved. The website especially focuses on the quasi-religious
aspect mentioned above, based on the concept of the earth-goddess, Gaia.

You
can read here how many of the people holding prominent positions in United
Nations bodies, and other powerful groups concerned with sustainable
development, protection of the environment in general, and 'climate change'
have explicitly stated their belief in this 'earth religion'.

It seems that
the major concern of this website is the fact that Gaia worship is an
attempt to replace traditional religion, especially Christianity, and the
belief in a supreme being, God. However, the website does not dwell very
much on this point – this concern is more implied than explicitly stated.

This is a hard-hitting political video that
was made before the 2013 Australian federal election. It reveals the conflicts of interest between prominent politicians
and important climate-related advisors and their links with investment banks, environmental
groups and the U.N. Agenda 21 movement.

These people are typical examples of
the same situation that exists in all the developed English-speaking
countries and, to some extent, in all the major countries of the West.
It was produced by the Australian group,
http://www.galileomovement.com.au/.

http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/This is a
very well-written and well-researched website written by Canadian journalist
Donna Laframboise. In the spirit of investigative journalism, most articles
on that website are more political and activist in nature than purely scientific.

The website, http://www.thegwpf.com/(The
Global Warming Policy Forum) from Britain. Has several articles on the politics of the AGW
movement. Some of the most well-known scientists who criticize the AGW
movement are connected to that website.

Other Groups Related to the Club
of Rome

There are three other groups that are
similar to the Club of Rome in their ideology and membership. In fact some
of the same people belong to these other groups. These are the Bilderberggroup,
Le Cercle, which
is focused on security, and the 1001 Club. It is notable that all four
groups have tried to keep a low profile over the years and could even be
described as secretive.

The 1001 Club is especially significant
concerning the AGW movement because it seems to have been formed so that
control of the environmental group, the Worldwide
Fund for Nature (WWF) is kept in the hands of the same billionaire
and aristocratic class of people as the Club of Rome.

It is well known that Bill Gates,
through his Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is an avid supporter of the
Man-Made Global Warming movement, although he surely knows that the evidence
for AGW does not stand up to scientific scrutiny.

What is not so well-known
is that his father served on the board of the Parenthood Federation of
America. That
organization was started by the racist eugenicist, Margaret Sanger and was
(is?) financially supported by the Rockefeller Foundation.

The Wikipedia article on Bill Gates has
the following statement, "Gates has credited the generosity and extensive
philanthropy of David Rockefeller as a major influence. Gates and his father
met with Rockefeller several times, and their charity work is
partly modeled
on the Rockefeller family's philanthropic focus, whereby they are
interested in tackling the global problems that are ignored by governments
and other organizations".

The more you know about David
Rockefeller and about the Rockefeller Foundation, the more you will
appreciate the significance of them. They, along with some allied groups in
Britain, are the origin of much of the
social engineering that has taken place over the years and is very
prevalent today.

Have a look at this parody, "David
Rockefeller Passes the Eugenics Torch to Bill Gates" -

I also wrote some
notes expressing my opinion on the topic of The Relationship Between Party-Political
Ideology and Climate Change. The conclusion of
these notes
especially addresses the fact that organized socialism today is strongly
backing the man-made global warming movement. That is, organized socialism
today strongly supports a movement that is the brainchild of their
traditional ideological enemy, international finance capitalism!

(It is just my personal opinion but ....) I believe these people, or people
ideologically allied to the Club of Rome, are behind several different
propaganda and brainwashing campaigns since they want to change society in
several different ways. The true nature of some of these
campaigns is quite well-known now, such as the fraudulent "war
on terror", which should be more accurately described as, "The war
of terror". You might also want to research the term, "crisis actor".

I
also believe the following two campaigns form part of their 'global
governance' plan, although it is sometimes not clear exactly what the motives
behind these campaigns are.

2) The massive increase in the number of fear and terror-inducing children's
movies produced by Hollywood since about the year 2001

Some of these films are
created to make viewers momentarily jump in reaction to something scary but
otherwise mostly contain benign elements such as humor. Other films are more
focused on a continuous fear or horror theme.
It's rare to see any kids' movies
or movies for teenagers coming out of Hollywood nowadays that are completely
free of this mental pollution unless the film is used to promote
a fantasy in little boys for being a member of the military such as a fighter
pilot, for example Planes.

Just look at the Harry Potter books and films, how they
evolved from harmless magic to fear, terror, violence and authoritarianism. The
last few Harry Potter films were actually classified in many parts of the world
as not suitable for children under 12. Look also at how the Toy Story 3 film
reduced little kids to fearful tears.

Parents don't want to take their 7-year-old kids to see a
kids' film called "Toy Story" and then have the kids cry in the movie theatre!
Psychologists know that if you expose children to frequent fear, they
will grow up to be more easily influenced by fear-campaigns and more easily
controlled. More about Toy Story 3
here.

Here's another example. Lewis Carroll's "Alice in Wonderland"
is described by
Wikipedia as "fantasy" and
Amazon Books uses words such as, "strange" and "make-believe" to
describe it. Sure, there were a couple of characters in the story who are a bit
scary but the original story has never been described as a kind of horror story.
Now watch this short Youtube trailer of the recent Hollywood movie, "Alice in
Wonderland" –
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WbhCUX1g5I. There is an obvious agenda
here!

People under the age of 35 today would have trouble seeing how
Hollywood films have changed. They naively believe that it is just the way
Hollywood is, or it is just the fashion in movies today that has evolved in some
natural way. But Hollywood has always reflected the ideological aims of "the
powers that be", especially after the work of the so-called 'public relations
expert' (read as, propagandist or mind-control expert), Edward Bernays
gained prominence in the U.S. following the publication of his book,
Propaganda in 1928.

Looking at the three topics I covered on this page, Man-Made
Global Warming, the "Depression Industry" and The Nature of Children's
Films
produced by Hollywood today, we see one common denominator – FEAR.

[Almost all of the psychosis, the schizophrenia mentioned
under the topic of "The Depression Industry" is
Paranoid Schizophrenia, where the fear mechanism of the brain
runs haywire.]

Here, "The only thing we have to fear" can mean two different
things: a) "have to fear" = "must fear" or, b) "The only thing we have to fear"
= "The only that that exists that we need fear" Both interpretations come
to the same conclusion but I think he meant b), the second meaning. He made this
famous statement at his inauguration in 1933, at the the height of the Great
Depression.

In other words, he was telling the populace, many of whom had
no job and who could only see a bleak future that they need not fear such things
as not being able to pay their bills, losing their job, going broke, and losing
their home. Why not? I think it was because fear is related to a person's belief
of what will or might happen in the future; it hasn't happened yet. FDR
was basically telling the people that the future can and will be different to
what they think it will be. It's bit like the old saying, "It's all in the
mind". Fear can cripple a person, or a whole population. FDR was saying
that having a pessimistic view of the future, fear, was the real enemy.

Logically, if fear is the enemy, then those who peddle and
promote fear are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

There's something about people trying to influence and
manipulate the minds of other people, for their own selfish motives that I do not like. If you feel
the same, spread the word.

A
cartoon for those readers who think this is all just ridiculous "conspiracy
theory". There is a point when some conspiracy theories become "conspiracy
reality".